When I was going to
primary school in Communist China in the early 1970s, a political movement
started, called "ping fa pi ru" (evaluate the Legalists
and criticize the Confucians). On the surface, the movement
glorified the Legalists in Chinese history, especially Shang Yang and Han
Fei, who were considered to have contributed to innovative legal reforms,
whereas the Confucians were condemned because they looked backward to a
golden age of the past and wanted to "pull the wheel of history
backward," to use a typical phrase from the People's Daily,
the official organ of the Communist Party. Shang Yang was celebrated
as a martyr, as after his reform fell through, he was subjected to the
cruelest form of punishment by his political opponents: having his four
limbs tied to four horses riding in four different directions. The
real purpose of the political movement was actually to use an attack on
ancient Confucians to allude to the so called present-day Confucians in
the Communist Party who were, by the standards of political radicals, not
radical or revolutionary enough and should be ousted. This is
just an example of how the Confucians and the Legalists mattered two
thousand years afterwards.

Doctrine-wise, the Legalists
obviously differed from the Confucians in their emphasis on a naturally
selfish human nature. Wisdom, to them, did not lie in the human
heart, but in the rational application of laws to the people. They
shrugged off the Confucian ideas of moral cultivation, and dismissed an
emphasis on etiquette and rituals as empty and useless because they did
not touch upon the basics of human life--the material conditions and
economic well-being. Here we will just concentrate on the
writings of Shang Yang and Han Fei Zi, as well as Li Si, who started the
"burning Confucian books" movement in the Qin Dynasty (221-207
B.C.), the first unified empire in Chinese history. The question to
ask is, why did the Confucians eventually triumph over the Legalists in
the following Han Dynasty(202 B.C.-220 A.D.)?

The passages of Sun Zi will not be
discussed here. The reading of Sun Zi is optional, although he is
interesting to read. His advice on military strategies were followed
even in the 20th century in the Chinese Communist Party's guerrilla
warfare first against the Japanese in World War II and then in the Chinese
Civil War. Today, Sun Zi is widely read in corporate America as his
advice on military warfare is said to offer good insight into corporate
competition. You are not required to read Li Si, either, although it
is useful to remember that he was the Legalist adviser to the first
Chinese emperor Qin Shihuang (previous ones were kings) to burn the
Confucian books.

1. Shang Yang (d.338 B.C.) and his advice
to the duke of Qin (the state that ultimately unified China in 221 B.C.)

From
Shang Yang one can see some exemplary characteristics of the Legalists:

De-emphasis or disregard for the Confucian
rituals and traditions. (194)

To him, law is based
not on tradition, but on something called realpolitik in European
politics: politics based on a realistic appraisal of the situation and of
human nature. Unlike the Confucians who believed in ethical human
nature, the Legalists believed humans were naturally selfish and
self-seeking. Rulers therefore need to take that into
consideration. And a talented ruler should not be "enslaved"
by rites and tradition.

Well-being of a state relied on the clarity
of law. (194)

Connected with his
view on human nature, since officials could not serve as moral exemplars for
their people (to Shang Yang, officials and commoners alike shared the same
nature), clear laws served as almost the only guidance for good official
conduct: "The way to administer a state well is for the laws regulating
officials to be clear; one does not rely on men to be intelligent and
thoughtful..."

The state should reward the practical
trades such as farming. (194-195)

Because of his
emphasis on real politics, agriculture and war, instead of moral
cultivation, became Shang Yang's tools to achieve peace and stability.
Agriculture and other practical trades, therefore, should be encouraged
instead of the trade where only words are used, meaning the literati, or shi,
who were extensively employed by rulers during the time of Confucius and the
Warring States Period that Shang Yang lived in.

The state should provide clear and
unambiguous guidance to the people. (195-196)

Because national
strength ultimately depended on agriculture and war, enforced on a daily
basis by law, other "softer" and more ambiguous forms of enforcing
policies, such as manipulations of words, rituals and music, ethical
principles such as kindness and humaneness, promoted deviations from a clear
adherence to laws. Here one gets a good view of how Shang Yang viewed
the people, who could be governed best only through clear and unambiguous
laws dictating to them what to do.

The people should be kept weak to enable
the state to be strong. (197-198)

Shang Yang's views on human nature was
reflected in his emphasis on strict rules to instill fear in people.
Since human nature tends to be self-seeking, which is in violation of the
centralized rule of the state. People should be kept weak if the state
wants to be strong.

2. Han Fei Zi and his views on Confucian
learning.

Han Fei Zi (again, the Zi was a
respectful way of addressing Han Fei, an eminent scholar by all standards)
(d.233 B.C.), like Shang Yang ahead of him, served the state of Qin before
its final unification of China. In his writings he pointed out that
public and private interests, unlike what the Confucians said, were
irreconcilable: that a son who confessed the father's sins served the public
good but violated filial piety, and filial piety may be performed at the
expense of the state (201). Therefore, along the lines of other
Legalists, Han Fei emphasized the importance of "uniform and
inflexible" laws (201), since the Confucian emphasis on moral
self-cultivation could not naturally lead to the benefit of the
state/nation.

Like Shang Yang, Han Fei believed
people were by nature self-seeking and would find an easy way out if they
could, therefore they should not be provided with any alternatives except
for clearly laid out laws. (203)

In other words, in order not to
"mislead" the people, teachings must be in accord with the laws,
otherwise they should not be taught. Confucian learning should not be
recommended also because of the added problem that it took into
consideration only tradition and the past, and not the present situation
that laws are based upon. (205)